Brinton.] «^-^v) [Nov. 4, 



The translation of the first line offers no particular difficulty, as 

 the initial E is prothetic and strengthening, and there are plenty 

 of examples where s is preserved between two vowels for later r. 

 Nor about line second is their serious controversy. The compound 

 Iverve may fairly be luem rueni {ruinatn), and we may render : 



" Help us, O Lares ; 

 And, O Marmar, let not blight nor ruin fall upon tlie flowers." 



Or, perhaps, instead oi pleores^=-flores, we may take it pieores^=z 

 piures, a.x\6. translate "upon the multitude," though this has less 

 pertinence. 



But the third line is where the commentators have broken down. 

 The latest authority within my reach, Prof. Allen, of Yale College, 

 gives it up as hopeless, and leaves it untranslated. Mommsen pro- 

 poses that it shall be split in two, one half an appeal to the gods, 

 Satur esto, fere inars .' "Be satiate, fierce Mars," and the other 

 half to the individual brethren, In limen insili ! Sta ! Verbera 

 (limen) ! 



This is terribly strained. Mars was not a fierce deity, nor god 

 of war to the Etruscan, but of peace, of agriculture, and of the 

 springtime. He was guardian of the husbandman, not of the 

 warrior. The word Berber is repeated three times, without any 

 variation, and is plainly a reduplicated proper name, like Marmar in 

 the previous line, to which it bears a distinct rhythmical relation. 

 The stonecutter would not have made the same error three times 

 over in such a common word as verbera, if that had been his copy. 

 For these reasons, and others which he himself advances, and 

 which, being of a purely scholastic character, I need not quote, the 

 distinguished linguist of the College de France, Prof. Michel Brdal, 

 proposes the reading : 



"Sata tutere, Mars ; clemens satis esto, Berber." 



He is convinced that we must accept the last word as Berber, 

 but as to its significance he is at a loss, and suggests that it may be 

 " une variante de Marmar." 



This suggestion has not been admitted even by those who accept 

 his reading. They have presented various guesses; none near the 

 mark, if we may judge by their reception.* But suppose, along 



* See Ch. Schaebel, iu Actts de la SociUe Philologique, Tome xiv, p. 200 aq. 



